CO885-(11-13) — Page 237

7291.

PUBLIC

RECORD

OFFICE

C.O.

Reference :-

885

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO

12 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

MY LORD,

No. 27.

(CANADA.)

LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.

Lincoln's Inn, 24th June 1874. We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Lord Tenterden's letter of the 18th June instant, stating that, with reference to his letter of the 12th instant, he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us the accom- panying copies of a further telegram which has been received from Sir E. Thornton, stating the form in which Mr. Fish has agreed to submit the draft Treaty of Reciprocity to the Senate of the United States for their opinion as to its signature, and Lord Tenterden was to request that we would take the same into our consideration, and favour your Lordship with our opinion whether there are any objections to the draft being approved.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have taken these papers into con- sideration, and have the honour to

Report

That we are aware the objections to the Treaty, which we submit to your Lordship's consideration, may be caused by the Constitution of the United States and the Govern- ment of each independent State, and therefore insuperable.

But we desire to point out to your Lordship that the Government of Canada is under the obligation to enlarge certain canala (Art. V.), and to construct (Art. VI.) certain other canals, and to deepen (Art. V.) certain parts of the channel of the St. Lawrence. The time for the completion of such works is specified.

The United States, however, only engage (Art. VI.) to urge upon the Government of the State of New York to cause existing canal from Whitehall, on Lake Champlain, to Albany, to be enlarged, and other works, if necessary, carried out.

The difference is obvious. The Treaty on the part of the United States will be satisfied by a mere request made by that Government upon that of New York to do the works named, and no date is mentioned. On the other side, the Dominion is absolutely bound to complete the works by a given time. The works need not even be commenced, much less completed, by the United States.

It seems to us that reciprocity is entirely absent from such an agreement as this, and we cannot find that paragraphs 2 and 4 of Art. VIII. constitute a reciprocity, either as to the construction, time of construction, or use of the canals named in those paragraphs,

We submit that the Dominion should not be put under the positive obligation to the United States to construct certain works, unless the United States are put under a corresponding obligation to construct the works required of the United States, and that a time should be named for the completion of the works to be done by the United States.

The last sentence of paragraph 1 of Art. VIII. is, in our opinion, extremely ambiguous. The words "free navigation" have no definite meaning, and the laws and regulations of the United States, or of the States bordering on the Lakes Champlain and Michigan, may impose upon the subjects of the Dominion navigating those waters tolls and duties not imposed upon subjects of the United States, and yet these tolls and duties may not be inconsistent with some sense or interpretation of the words "free navigation."

We think that it would be most advisable to avoid this ambiguity, which may lead to future complications, and impair the reciprocity which is a leading object of the Treaty.

We respectfully submit to your Lordship with this view that the United States and Government of New York should be put under explicit obligation to make and com-. plete the works assigned to them pari passu with the works undertaken by the Dominion.

And that as to the navigation of Lakes Champlain and Michigan, that navigation should be enjoyed by subjects of the Dominion on terms of equality with inhabitants or citizens of the United States.

▲ 12916-28. 25.-19/84.